USDA eGovernment Act Report 2003

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) eGovernment Act Report

December 2003

United States Department of Agriculture – eGovernment Act Report

Table of Contents

Attachment A - General compliance............................................................................................4

1. Ongoing Dialogue.....................................................................................................................4

2. E-Government Initiatives........................................................................................................5I. eAuthentication (Enabling)...............................................................................................................6

Purpose (Cross-cutting)..................................................................................................................................6Project Status (Control)..................................................................................................................................6Performance Measures...................................................................................................................................7Agency Partners (USDA-wide; Government-wide)........................................................................................7Cost Savings and Benefits...............................................................................................................................7

II. eLearning (Enabling).......................................................................................................................8Purpose (Internal Efficiency and Effectiveness).............................................................................................8Project Status (Control)..................................................................................................................................8Performance Measures...................................................................................................................................9Agency Partners (Government-wide).............................................................................................................9Cost Savings and Benefits...............................................................................................................................9

III. eDeployment (Enabling)...............................................................................................................10Purpose (Internal Efficiency and Effectiveness)...........................................................................................10Project Status (Control)................................................................................................................................10Performance Measures.................................................................................................................................10Agency Partners (USDA-wide).....................................................................................................................11Cost Savings and Benefits.............................................................................................................................11

IV. eGrants (Strategic)........................................................................................................................12Purpose (Government to Business)..............................................................................................................12Project Status (Select)...................................................................................................................................12Performance Measures.................................................................................................................................12Agency Partners (Cross-Agency; Government-wide)..................................................................................12Cost Savings and Benefits.............................................................................................................................12

V. eLoans (Strategic)...........................................................................................................................13Purpose (Government to Citizen).................................................................................................................13Project Status (Select)...................................................................................................................................13Performance Measures.................................................................................................................................13Agency Partners (Cross-Agency; Government-wide)..................................................................................13Cost Savings and Benefits.............................................................................................................................14

VI. Web-based Supply Chain Management (Strategic)...................................................................14Purpose (Government to Business)..............................................................................................................14Project Status (Control)................................................................................................................................15Performance Measures.................................................................................................................................15Agency Partners (Cross-agency)..................................................................................................................15Cost Savings and Benefits.............................................................................................................................15

VII. Food Safety and Security Tools (Strategic)...............................................................................16Purpose (Government to Citizens)................................................................................................................16Project Status (Select)...................................................................................................................................16Performance Measures.................................................................................................................................16Agency Partners (Cross-agency)..................................................................................................................17Cost Savings and Benefits.............................................................................................................................17

VIII. Online Trade Assistance (Strategic).........................................................................................17

3. Ensure Availability................................................................................................................18I. Rural Communities Receive Broadband Grants..........................................................................19II. CSREES-CYFAR...........................................................................................................................19

USDA/OCIO/eGovernment Program • April 11, 2023


4. Additional Areas of Progress................................................................................................20

5. Privacy....................................................................................................................................20I. System and Unique Identifier.........................................................................................................20II. Persistent Tracking Technology...................................................................................................21III. Agency goals for machine readability.........................................................................................21IV. Contact information......................................................................................................................22

6. Human Capital. Sec. 209.........................................................................................................22A. OPM outlines workforce planning...............................................................................................22B. Identify the Job Categories............................................................................................................24C. Coordination With Your Agency’s Human Capital Planning Officials....................................24D. What strategies have you identified to help close the competency gaps?..................................25E. Measures of Success........................................................................................................................27

Attachment C - Progress update on the Government Paperwork Elimination Act..............28

1. Introduction..............................................................................................................................28

2. GPEA Statistical Overview.....................................................................................................28

3. Next Steps.................................................................................................................................31

Appendices....................................................................................................................................32Appendix A - Use of Cookies on Web Pages.....................................................................................33Appendix B - GPEA Completion Status Report from the GSA Access Tool................................34Appendix C - GPEA Non-Completed Transaction Report.............................................................35

Tables............................................................................................................................................36Table 2a.i - eAuthentication Strategic/Agency Performance Measures.........................................37Table 2a.ii - eLearning Strategic/Agency Performance Measures.................................................40Table 2a.iii - eDeployment Strategic/Agency Performance Measures...........................................42Table 2a.iv - eGrants Strategic/Agency Performance Measures....................................................48Table 2a.v - eLoans Strategic/Agency Performance Measures.......................................................51Table 2a.vi - Web-based Supply Chain Strategic/Agency Performance Measures......................53Table 2a.vii - Food Safety & Security Tools Strategic/Agency Performance Measures...............55



Attachment A - General compliance

1. Ongoing Dialogue

Describe how agency maintains an ongoing dialogue with interested parties to find innovative ways to use IT (include state, local, and tribal governments, private and non-profit sectors, and the general public). Sec. 101, 3602

Under the leadership of Secretary Ann Veneman, the Department has pioneered the creation of an eGovernment/Information Technology (IT) Advisory Board comprised of citizens, employees, and business partners – the three stakeholder groups around whom our eGovernment Strategic Plan1 is organized – to inform our eGovernment investment priorities, improve the quality of the solutions we create, and increase awareness among interested parties of our efforts. After publishing a Federal Register notice to this effect, nominations for this 9-member body are currently being received.

Feedback from citizens, employees, and business partners was also solicited in the process of developing our eGovernment Strategic Plan and determining the readiness of various stakeholders for the bold transformation we have undertaken. The Department also has created a community of interest around usability studies for and customer feedback on our Web sites and applications. This includes creating and sharing results and best practices as to process and tools and we have established a special section of our eGovernment Web site dedicated to this topic. Several USDA agencies and staff offices – Economic Research Service (ERS), the Risk Management Agency (RMA), Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), Office of Communications (OC), and Service Center Agencies Rural Development (RD), Farm Service Agency (FSA) and Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) – have led the way in this regard. By way of only a few examples, the Service Center Agencies have conducted an aggressive eGovernment outreach campaign to farmers including surveys, attendance at numerous farm and trade shows, usability studies, and discussion groups. The results of these inputs have been shared with all development personnel in these agencies. A major redesign of USDA.gov has employed lessons learned from this study as well as a detailed audience analysis and recently conducting usability studies with 16 participants representing key segments of our customers. RMA’s usability efforts involved farmers, insurers and employees helping design a critical application and FSIS’ studied a redesign of its site by testing the scientific community, food industry representatives, media, and food inspectors. Further, to save money and improve our collective impact, OCIO has been coordinating the purchase of a common tool for all of our agencies to get immediate customer feedback on our Web sites.

Several agencies – the Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service (CSREES), Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) and Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) – have reached out to their core customers and stakeholders (rural, state and land grant universities; producers, suppliers and transportation providers; and state and local governments respectively) in the process of developing detailed business cases and innovative approaches for eGovernment solutions. CSREES has discussed opportunities for electronic tools to improve grant making and knowledge management and data sharing capabilities with hundreds of leaders from state/land

1 A copy of our eGovernment Strategic Plan, FY 2002-2006 can be found on our eGovernment Web site at www.egov.usda.gov.


http://www.egov.usda.gov/


grant colleges and 1890 schools. AMS has discussed eCommerce supply chain improvement plans with key partners in its complex international network of sourcing, logistics, and transportation as well as solicited input from commodity groups for eGovernment applications. And FNS has reached out to grocery stores chains and industry leads in developing plans for improving electronic benefits transfer for WIC and Food Stamps as well as working closely with state administrative agencies around replicable, new eGovernment solutions that would save federal, state and local government resources, enhance customer service, and help improve financial management.

Finally, the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) has surveyed thousands of farmers annually as to their adoption of technology for personal and business purposes and the 2002 Agricultural Census taking had expanded questions in this area.2

2. E-Government Initiatives

Briefly describe agency E-government initiatives, addressing the following for each initiative:

a) Identify performance measures that demonstrate how electronic government enables progress toward agency objectives, strategic goals, and statutory mandates.

b) Identify other agency partners who collaborate on the initiative.c) If agency can quantify the cost savings created by implementing the initiative,

identify the savings and describe methodology used.

USDA has embarked on an electronically-enabled business transformation. Under the auspices of the President’s Management Agenda and rooted in the rising expectations of our customers and business partners, this journey started with the development of a common eGovernment strategy by and for all 29 of USDA’s agencies and staff offices. This strategy called for full support by USDA for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) eGovernment Presidential Initiatives and for the adoption of 12 high-priority “Smart Choices” — cross-agency or enterprise-wide initiatives. The strategy was approved by USDA’s Executive Information Technology Investment Review Board (“E-Board”), which next called for the development of detailed business cases for all 12 of the high priority initiatives and which secured financial and human resources to support the Presidential Initiatives. After painstaking work by hundreds of USDA personnel representing all agencies and staff offices, the E-Board approved Pre-Select business cases for all of the Enablers and Strategics in July of 2002. In February of 2003, the E-Board approved the Select level business cases for all of the Enablers. The E-Board subsequently voted to adopt these 12 high priority initiatives and migration to the Presidential Initiatives as part of the Department’s nascent Enterprise Architecture. The E-Board also prioritized funding across the Department for these USDA and Presidential Initiatives and has mandated that any spending duplicative of USDA or Presidential Initiatives be halted. In other reports to OMB we have detailed our participation in the Presidential Initiatives and given the eGovernment Act report guidance we will only mention them in passing in various sections of this report focusing instead on our Smart Choice initiatives. We also welcome the opportunity to share with OMB many of the exciting agency-specific eGovernment solutions we are developing in areas not covered by a Presidential Initiative or USDA Smart Choice.

2 “Farm Computer Usage and Ownership,” National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2001



eGovernment Presidential Initiatives

USDA is an active participant in 20 of 25 eGovernment Presidential Initiatives and the Federal Health Architecture Initiative coordinated under the auspices of the President’s Management Council of the OMB.

In FY 2003, the Department contributed $7.1M in total to all 10 Initiatives to which it was asked to contribute. In FY 2004 and 2005, these amounts are expected to total approximately $7.0M and $7.3M respectively. In addition to financial contributions, USDA has provided approximately 16 FTEs to these efforts in FY 2003. Our leadership in ePayroll, Recreation.gov, Grants.gov, eAuthentication, Geospatial One Stop, Recruitment One Stop, and eLearning initiatives has been particularly noted by OMB and the respective managing partners.

eGovernment Smart Choices

Some of these investments, called “Enablers” are the building blocks and foundational infrastructure necessary to efficiently and effectively move the Department to eGovernment. Some of these investments, employing the capabilities of the Enablers, are “Strategic” in nature and represent the areas in which mission critical business processes can be dramatically enhanced to improve customer service and save taxpayer dollars.

All of these investments comprise and an “actionable” enterprise architecture.

Below, more details — purpose, current status, performance measures, partner agencies, and costs/benefits — are provided by initiative in response to OMB’s specific questions.

I. eAuthentication (Enabling)

Purpose (Cross-cutting)

USDA’s eAuthentication initiative pioneers an enterprise-wide service that will enable citizens, business partners, and employees to access information and services and conduct electronic transactions in a secure, online environment. USDA has made considerable progress toward this goal in FY 2003 by implementing an enterprise service that is based on the Web Centralized Authentication and Authorization Facility (WebCAAF) providing NIST Levels 1 and 2. The eAuthentication services will provide the authentication services supporting the legislative mandates defined in the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) and the eGovernment Act of 2002. USDA is expanding the environment and capabilities and will be piloting with Grants.gov as part of the General Service Administration (GSA) eAuthentication initiative.

Project Status (Control)

This initiative is now in the Control phase.

The Service Center Agencies deployed the initial service in June 2002. The expanded implementation phase for use by non-service center agencies began on July 28, 2003. Pre-Implementation design tasks were completed on July 25, 2003 and implementation tasks, which



include expansion of the technical architecture and integration with the agency applications, began on July 28, 2003.

On October 19th, 2003, USDA launched the USDA eAuthentication service, an enterprise-wide eAuthentication system. USDA is one of the first Federal Agencies to implement such a centralized authentication tool. Release II of the solution is currently underway and expected in March 2004.

Performance Measures Please refer to Table 2.a.i on page 37.

Agency Partners (USDA-wide; Government-wide)

The USDA eAuthentication initiative is an enterprise-wide service that was launched across all of USDA in October 2003. Currently, several USDA agencies, including RD, NASS, AMS, FNS, Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), and Forest Service (FS), are integrating some 56 new and existing applications with the eAuthentication service with many more to come. Moreover, USDA’s National Finance Center (NFC) has developed Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) solutions for government to government transactions (G2G) as part of an integrated USDA eAuthentication suite of services. The USDA eAuthentication efforts are fully integrated with the GSA-led eAuthentication Presidential Initiative and we expect several of the 25 initiatives to use the USDA service as well as other applications from other Federal Departments and agencies serving similar customers. We have been actively working on a government-wide basis to help shape the GSA-led effort and serve on the governing architecture working group and have provided both technical and financial resources to this effort.

Cost Savings and Benefits

Strategic: o Improves the user experience by providing a single solution to access multiple accounts.o Leverages industry “best practices” and expertise across USDA.o Aligns with the Presidential Initiative for eAuthentication.o Provides the foundation to support and enables other USDA eGovernment initiatives.

Financial:o Obtains volume benefits and promotes “economies of scale”.o Reduces costs and inefficient processes resulting from the development and maintenance

of duplicative authentication tools, processes, and applications.o Cost savings from reducing maintenance costs.o Cost savings and avoidance from a reduction in risk.o Cost savings in help desk support.o Productivity increase from Single Sign-on across agency applications.o The NPV is equal to $81,383,821 and the ROI is equal to 208%.3

Operational:3 All business cases/OMB 300s are done in accordance with OMB and USDA Capital Planning and Investment Control Guidance. All financial calculations adhere to standards established therein.



o Increases productivity of USDA employees.o Provides a framework for centrally identifying, managing, and mitigating risk levels.o Establishes department-wide policies and standards to promote interoperability and

reduce risk.

II. eLearning (Enabling)

Purpose (Internal Efficiency and Effectiveness)

The eLearning initiative, a full partnership with the E-Training Presidential Initiative, helps USDA create, store, reuse, manage and deliver learning content from a central repository and manage all styles of training delivery (online and classroom) in a consistent manner. eLearning provides employees, partners, and customers with the knowledge and information required to be successful in their jobs or interactions with USDA agencies by providing timely and relevant learning opportunities that they can take at their convenience and at their own pace. Through a Learning Management System (LMS), users will be able to identify the critical competencies and skills required for their job along with the recommended learning activities necessary to build them. Implementation of the enterprise LMS and related online collaboration tools and integration with USDA’s human resources and financial management systems are currently underway. The initiative is directly linked to both the expanding electronic government and human capital management elements of the President’s Management Agenda. In particular, this effort is a component of the E-Training Presidential Initiative and represents government-wide collaboration in the development and purchasing of services, software, and courseware.


This initiative is now in the Control phase.

The OMB mandated Federal agencies to leverage LMS service providers available through the President’s Government-wide E-Training Initiative. USDA adopted a policy in July 2003 requiring all USDA agencies to exclusively utilize commercial off the shelf (COTS) courseware available through the E-Training service providers. Agency teams completed an evaluation of LMS products and services available through that Initiative and recommended selection of a vendor and product. On September 22, 2003, USDA announced its partnership with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and GoLearn.gov to implement its enterprise-wide LMS. A team of USDA agency staff selected Plateau, a GoLearn.gov commercial partner, to develop the Department’s LMS. The services will be delivered to agencies in a series of phases. The first of these phases will launch in early 2004 and will include 12 agencies with a total of approximately 10,000 users.

Performance Measures

Please refer to Table 2.a.ii on page 40.

Agency Partners (Government-wide)



All USDA agencies and staff offices are partners in this initiative, which utilizes the services of golearn.gov. Current efforts to date revolve around standing up an enterprise-wide learning management system for employees, creating USDA-specific content related to our mission-fulfillment, and leveraging the purchase of general management and skills curriculum However, it is our hope that eventually eLearning capabilities will benefit citizens and business partners in future phases.


Strategic: o Leverages interdepartmental solutions through integration with the Presidential E-

Training Initiative.Competencies linked to courseware and individual development plans to reach other government agencies and tie them to the agency’s strategic plans.Financial:

o Creates a tangible revenue model for agencies to offer/utilize training with other agencies or Departments outside USDA.Allows for economies of scale in the Department-wide purchase of eLearning products/services.

o Providing the most rapid implementation through a vendor, leading to the earliest realization of cost savings. Typically 80-90% of potential returns are realized in Year 1 and 100% of potential returns are realized in Year 2.

o Leveraging the content available in GoLearn.gov decreases the costs for government-wide training content immediately.

o Leveraging economies of scale with vendor pricing realizes the greatest discounts on course materials, maintenance costs, and updates.

o Enabling on-line help and support menus result in fewer training related support inquiries and reduce the amount of time employees spend waiting for responses on common questions.

o Increasing availability of content through electronic delivery and reducing distribution, printing, materials, and postage costs of USDA developed courses.

o The NPV is equal to $34,130,671 and the ROI is equal to 131%.Operational:o Enhances the skill development of USDA employees by increasing access to a wide

array of training.o Coordinates management and promotes interagency collaboration of Federal e-Learning

services by USDA.Eliminates redundancies among training offered within the Department.III. eDeployment (Enabling)Purpose (Internal Efficiency and Effectiveness)eDeployment is a collection of business processes, standards, and technology tools that will enable USDA to achieve its goals and objectives for eGovernment by leveraging investments and delivering government services in a more citizen-centric manner. Specifically, the eDeployment initiative is comprised of the following:Web Content Management: Management of content to be made available online;

Document/Records Management: Management of documents and other electronic assets;

Portal Services: Aggregation and universal availability of content and applications by topic and/or by a user’s intention; and

Web Presence: Standards and guidelines for look, feel and navigation of Web pages and Web-based applications.



By integrating common technologies, processes, and standards, eDeployment makes possible the following:

Creation of a consistent and intuitive customer and employee interface for all online applications;

Sharing and managing online content, documents, records, and other electronic media; Consolidating and sharing of data; Accessing information and services by area of interest versus USDA’s organizational

structure; Leveraging existing technology investments; and Adhering to legislative mandates and participation in Presidential Initiatives.

The services offered by eDeployment will be enterprise-wide: the Department, Agencies, and Federal eGovernment initiatives can leverage these shared, enterprise services. Since the need to effectively manage, share and deliver information is a common one, each agency or initiative will not have to create their own technology solutions and standards to implement these functions. Agencies and specific initiatives thus avoid the high cost and high learning curve of operating independently while using effective tools to better deliver their information.


This initiative is currently in the Control phase. Agency teams are currently performing a study of software products in the market place that will help USDA build these enterprise services according to enterprise-wide requirements identified in the select level business case phase.


Please refer to Table 2.a.iii on page 42.

Agency Partners (USDA-wide)

The eDeployment initiative resulted from an intensive, collaborative business case process with inputs from numerous participants across various agencies. It represents the experience and commitment of many individuals within the Department who are working towards the common goals of (1) leveraging our investments and (2) increasing the level of service the Department provides to all stakeholders and customers by taking a citizen-centered approach. The eDeployment initiative will provide USDA agencies with a common suite of technology capabilities to support customer-centered delivery of information and services. These common capabilities will eliminate the need for related single-agency solutions and will enable agencies to work collaboratively to provide information and services that are designed for the customer. eDeployment also supports USDA’s participation in Presidential Initiatives that are multi-agency; examples of this are “back office” solutions for eGrants and eLoans.




Strategic: o Increases citizen, business partner, and employee satisfaction.o Enhances image of USDA in the public, the private sector, and across Government.o Increases opportunity for success in other online strategic initiatives. Improves quality

and availability of content to citizens, business partners, and employees.o Enables the Department’s strategic initiatives to efficiently manage content.o Essential step towards improving records management across the Department.

Financial: o Lowers application development costs by providing an infrastructure for sharing

services across agencies.o Increases employee productivity by reducing time spent searching for documents and

responding to FOIA requests.Increases employee productivity by automating the assembly and distribution of content as well as the document routing and approval process.

o Reduces materials costs.o The NPV is equal to $426,764,601, and the ROI is equal to 254%.

Operational:o Centralizes access to department expertise; thereby decreasing development time.o Implements a standard design methodology that increases quality of delivery. Introduces

accountability to the content development process.o Allows programs to concentrate on the quality of their service instead of service

delivery.

IV. eGrants (Strategic)

Purpose (Government to Business)

The eGrants Initiative provides USDA a unique opportunity to leverage its investment for grant-making across the Department by implementing a single system that provides common, end-to-end support for the back office grants process while supporting the legitimate differences among USDA agencies.

Project Status (Select)

This initiative is in the Select phase. USDA continues to work actively to move this initiative forward. Currently, USDA grant making agencies are developing and implementing a Grants.gov Interface Module (GIM) to handle grant applications sent from the Grants.gov storefront. GIM will be the single point of contact for USDA with Grants.gov, and will ensure that USDA agencies and grants program offices receive the appropriate applications. USDA’s GIM solution is an interim solution enabling the Department to receive grant applications since



October 2003. It is expected that the GIM system will be revisited during the future implementation of USDA’s eGrants initiative.

To develop a USDA-wide receiving and routing solution in time for the projected October 31st release, the GIM team, composed of agency business and technical representatives, determined the initial agency roles for the system’s creation. This effort will leverage the technical resources of the involved agencies including significant investments already made in agency-specific grant systems.


Please refer to Table 2.a.iv on page 48.

Agency Partners (Cross-Agency; Government-wide)

All USDA agencies that post funding opportunities for grants and cooperative agreements and/or accept proposals for grants and cooperative agreements are affected. This includes CSREES, ERS, FAS, FS, AMS, NASS, NRCS, RD, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), and the Departmental Administration’s Office of Outreach. USDA has been a leading proponent of grants.gov and currently has committed to posting 111 grant programs from across the Department to the government-wide grants.gov solution.


Strategic: o Integrates with and supports Presidential eGrants Initiative (Grants.gov).o Enables customers to access information about grants funded by USDA and its

component agencies in one location at their convenience.o Complies with Federal Financial Assistance Management Improvement Act (P.L. 106–

107), Federal Grants Streamlining Program (FGSP) and GPEA. Financial:

o Reduces operating and technical expenditures.o Improves funds allocation management process.o Allows portfolio management of grants, including increased accountability, within

agencies and across the Department.o The NPV is equal to $3,731,000 and the ROI is equal to 45%.

Operational:o Reduces time from grant application submission to disbursement.o Reduces burden on the applicant, the grantee, and USDA administrative and program

staff alike.o Improves performance management and reporting capabilities including documenting

outcomes.o Reduces paper-based manual processes and increases efficiency.

V. eLoans (Strategic)



Purpose (Government to Citizen)

The USDA eLoans initiative will fundamentally transform the way loans are received by and delivered to the American public. In line with the eLoans Presidential Initiative, the USDA eLoans initiative is designed to put the needs of the citizen first by providing a single one-stop shopping experience for all USDA loans. The USDA eLoans initiative will build off of the Federal citizen-centric model and expand upon this opportunity to create a seamless loan origination and loan servicing operation for USDA loans.

The vision of eLoans is not necessarily to create one technology solution for all of USDA's loan programs, but rather to migrate existing systems to a Web-based platform in line with the best technology suite of solutions to optimize collaboration and ease of use. These transactions should be seamless and cohesive for both customers and employees.


This initiative is in the Select phase. USDA has continued to participate in efforts to prepare for and integrate with the eLoans Gateway. This gateway will educate citizens on federal loan programs with links to federal agencies and private sector resources. FY 2004 activities will include the identification of solutions for electronically collecting payments and transacting business.


Please refer to Table 2.a.v. on page 51.

Agency Partners (Cross-Agency; Government-wide)

USDA successfully fulfills this mission by leveraging a network of over 2,000 lending institutions throughout the Nation to provide both guaranteed and direct loans. There are four loan-making agencies in USDA, which provide a combination of direct and guaranteed loans, including FSA, Rural Housing Service (RHS), Rural Business-Cooperative Service (RBS), and Rural Utilities Service (RUS). All of these agencies participated in the development of an integrated business case and will work together on an eLoans back office pilot. As with Grants.gov, USDA has been supporting the government-wide eLoans Presidential Initiative with human and financial resources as well as content.


Strategic: o Integrates with and supports Presidential eLoans initiative.o Increases public awareness, understanding and knowledge of USDA loan programs;

increases exposure and reach of USDA programs to customers and underserved populations.

o Improves financial and risk management by loan recipients.o Reduces public burden and improved customer convenience and satisfaction.



o Complies with Federal mandates such as GPEA and Freedom to E-File Act, as well as President’s Management Agenda and FFAMIA (P.L. 106–107).

Financial: o Reduces operating and technical expenditures (i.e., time, file storage, data entry/errors,

etc.).o Reduces waste, fraud, and abuse.o The NPV is equal to $30,230,000 and the ROI is equal to $161%.

Operational:o Reduces time from customer application submission to loan disbursement.o Improves ability of employees to focus on programmatic activities.o Improves performance management and reporting capabilities regarding Loan Portfolio.

VI. Web-based Supply Chain Management (Strategic)

Purpose (Government to Business)

USDA proposes to fundamentally transform and enhance the way it delivers and operates its commodity programs. Over the next five years, the USDA plans to develop and implement a modern supply chain management system that will optimize its delivery and execution of its domestic and international food programs. This effort will focus on satisfying the needs of employees, food customers and suppliers by providing the information, tools and resources they need to receive and provide food across the globe. One of the most critical enablers of this transformation will be implementing and using advanced technologies to allow the seamless, transparent and efficient flow of food products throughout the supply chain process.

To fulfill these objectives, a COTS solution will be used. The COTS technology platform envisioned for Web-based Supply Chain Management (WBSCM) is in line with private sector technology solutions leveraged by many leading companies. Additionally, the system is designed so that after initial development and rollout is complete for commodity distribution programs and processed commodity management, it can be extended to USDA’s bulk commodity management programs (which include grain, sugar, and cotton), to replace the current Grain Inventory Management System (GIMS). These programs manage billions of dollars of inventory and touch over $5 billion of the FSA’s budget.


The WBSCM initiative is currently in the Control phase having been approved by OMB and the E-Board.


Please refer to Table 2.a.vi.on page 53.

Agency Partners (Cross-agency)



WBSCM project is a cross-agency effort including representatives from all USDA agencies involved in commodity distribution programs (AMS, FAS, FNS, and FSA), as well as the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration (MARAD). As part of the process of developing the business case, feedback from USDA business partners and customers across the supply chain process was considered.


Strategic: o Reduces costs for customers; reduces storage costs paid by school districts for late

deliveries.o Increases food aid and meals: A $50 million savings would fund the annual cost of the

Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) and/or USDA portion of millions of school meals.

o Collaborative planning serves more people and improves ability to meet customer demands.

Financial: o Reduces total commodity spending (estimated value: $120 million/year in 3-5 years);o Reduces transportation costs (estimated value $22-35 million).o Reduces inventory and warehouse costs and investments (estimated value: $0.3-$0.6

million).o Reduces information technology cost (estimated value $5-$8 million).o The significant estimated cumulative seven-year benefits of the WBSCM solution,

which will deliver additional productivity benefits, are expected to range from $455-790 million.

o A return on investment of between 209% and 437% is consistent with the benefits realized by private sector companies for similar supply chain investments.

Operational o Improves timely delivery of USDA commodities and reduces processing cycles.o Improves collaboration and integration across the Departments.o Ensures timely financial management and reconciliation and improves reporting

capabilities.

VII. Food Safety and Security Tools (Strategic)

Purpose (Government to Citizens)

USDA and other food safety agencies manage a complex system to protect the wholesomeness of all food produced or consumed by Americans. With increased threats against the safety of our food supply, however, it is crucial for USDA to use new tools to strengthen the food safety system while leveraging current investments to ensure the most effective use of the Department's limited resources.



This initiative will develop and implement an integrated suite of technology tools designed to help USDA respond to two most critical needs: Crisis Communication and Sharing of Data. Improved crisis communication will help agencies more quickly and effectively respond to food safety emergencies, as well as more efficiently and quickly communicate vital information to the public. Improved data sharing will strengthen detection and prevention of foodborne illness, thus helping to prevent outbreaks and minimizing the effects of those outbreaks that do occur.

Specifically, this initiative proposes six tools, each of which is designed to provide or enhance crucial crisis communication or data sharing capabilities USDA will need to maintain an effective and well-coordinated food safety system. Further, these tools will support and integrate with existing initiatives at USDA, including data management, wireless communications, and systems integration efforts in FSIS and APHIS.

Crisis Communication

Establishing an Interagency Food Safety Emergency Response Center

Strategic use of FoodSafety.gov as a communication vehicle

Equipping field staff with wireless-capable handheld devices

Data Sharing

Integration between USDA and U.S. Customs data systems

Expanding and enhancing the National Food Safety Laboratory System

Developing an animal disease monitoring and surveillance system.


With its Pre-select business case approved by the E-Board and OMB, this initiative is in the Select Phase.


Please refer to Table 2.a.vii on page 55.

Agency Partners (Cross-agency)

The goals outlined in this plan will require coordination among USDA agencies involved in food safety and security: FSIS, APHIS, AMS, CSREES, and ARS as well as food safety partner agencies including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the U.S. Customs Service, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).


Strategico This initiative directly supports both the President’s priority of improved homeland

security and USDA’s strategic goal of ensuring a safe food supply.



o It further leverages interdepartmental solutions (including the Project SAFECOM and International Trade Data System (ITDS) Presidential Initiatives) as envisioned in the President’s Management Agenda and our Departmental eGovernment Strategic Plan.

Financialo By integrating data across systems and improving communication within and between

agencies, this initiative will reduce both IT and program costs.o Streamlining will also reduce regulatory and paperwork burdens on business partners.o The NPV is equal to $26,246,000 and the ROI is equal to 100%.

Operationalo Improved interagency communication will facilitate coordination and reduce response

time. o New wireless capabilities will provide field employees with access to corporate data,

enabling better food safety hazard detection and decision-making. o Improved data sharing will reduce manual processes, produce more accurate data, and

help USDA better prevent, mitigate, and respond to food borne illness outbreaks.

VIII. Online Trade Assistance (Strategic)

USDA committed to stop further development of the Department's Online Trade Assistance initiative in favor of presenting the content through the International Trade Process Streamlining (Export.gov) Presidential Initiative. During FY 2003, USDA actively participated in the planning and implementation of the redesigned Export.gov portal that was released in April. Through this collaboration with the Department of Commerce, USDA saved approximately $4.7 million by not developing a standalone system. USDA became the first partner to accept customer information via Export.gov's one-stop-one-form online registry and use it to pre-populate forms. USDA's major contribution in FY 2004 will be to implement the $5.7 billion export credit guarantee programs that will allow U.S. exporters and banks to participate in the programs via the Internet.



3. Ensure Availability

How does your agency ensure availability of Government information and services is not diminished for those without access to the Internet? Sec. 202(c)

USDA has ambitious goals for transforming how we conduct business and for improving how we serve customers through the creative use of electronic technologies. But these goals do not imply that all of USDA’s transactions with citizens and business partners will be conducted online. First and foremost, USDA is a business about and for people; the human element in USDA’s services — the food inspector, the Extension agent, the county office — will neither be diminished nor displaced by the Internet. The Web will not entirely replace paper-based, phone, or live communications options for those who are dependent on or prefer these means. However, the Internet is a prominent and growing channel for service and product delivery that USDA must embrace. In our vision, Web-based technology will be used to support, supplement, and enhance the more meaningful personal interactions between citizens, business partners, and USDA employees.

USDA’s mission includes economic and community development for rural communities as well as food assistance programs for poor children and families. As such, access to information and services is particularly important to the Department, which both utilizes technology to better serve customers and operate efficiently but also seeks to empower communities and individuals with these skills and tools. eGovernment at USDA must enable the Department to fulfill its mission. Given USDA’s unique role in American society, we must both enable eCommerce and promote eGovernment. The latter is the subject of most of this report. The Department can accomplish the former by stimulating the participation of rural communities, 1890 and Land grants, and disadvantaged citizens in the expanding digital economy. Lack of access to technology and technical skills in an era dominated by electronic change threatens economic opportunity and social inclusion. USDA is doing many things — two of which, RD Broadband and Wireless efforts and CSREES outreach efforts are highlighted below — to help bridge the “digital divide.” Cognizant of our mission and this goal, USDA assessed the readiness of its core citizen customers for eGovernment and their level of Internet access. Some highlights are shared in the table below:

Major USDA Citizen Group Estimated # of Customers Internet AccessFarmers/Producers 2.2 Million 43%Rural Communities & Businesses 2.5 Million (direct),

50 Million (indirect)39%

Children 30 Million 89%Low-Income Families & Individuals ($15-$25K/yr)

20 Million 24%

Landowners and Conservationists 10 Million N/A

All Americans 285 Million 44%

In addition, all of the usability and customer outreach efforts described in Question 1 attempt to ensure the participation of under-represented communities and individuals. For example, given special consideration for Secretary Veneman’s outreach and inclusion goals as stipulated in the 2003 Risk Management Initiative, RMA mandated that minority, limited-resource, and specialty crop producers be part of the usability survey groups. Of related note to usability, we also have an active Section 508 compliance plan for those with Internet access but who are challenged with



disabilities. USDA is working hard, and it is committed to ensuring that all its Web applications meet Section 508 standards. One method through which USDA ensures compliance is by conducting usability testing. Testing not only seeks to ensure that customers find Web sites useful and can navigate the site easily, but also to officially certify that sites and applications meet Section 508 standards. In addition to developers attentive to the needs of individuals who are hearing impaired, visually impaired, and cognitive impaired when designing Section 508 compliant Web sites, we also work hard to ensure all our employees have assistive technologies to enable them to utilize eGovernment and IT tools through our recognized Technology Accessible Resources Gives Employment Today (TARGET) Center.

I. Rural Communities Receive Broadband Grants

Urban communities rely heavily on high-speed Internet services for personal, business and safety reasons. This capability allows citizens and businesses to communicate anywhere, anytime and at a lower cost than ever before. Until recently, these services were either limited or not available to many rural communities, despite the demand for high-speed access.

On September 24th, 2003, in an effort to expand these critical services to rural areas, USDA Secretary Ann Veneman awarded $11.3 million in broadband community grants to 34 communities in 20 states. Like many of the 56 million residents in the 2,305 counties that comprise rural America, these communities currently lack basic connectivity to hospitals and schools, including essential emergency connectivity for police and fire protection. The Community-Oriented Connectivity Broadband (Community Connect) Grant Program, supplemented by RD’s standard high-speed telecommunications loan program, enables rural communities to provide residents with high-speed Internet access. As a result, these citizens will now be able to take advantage of new opportunities such as online training, technical assistance, and other educational programs.

Additionally, USDA, through RUS, plays a critical role in expanding the capability of all citizens to benefit from eGovernment, especially those in rural communities. In addition to these efforts, RUS continues to lead the Federal Rural Wireless Outreach Initiative. In conjunction with the Federal Communications Commission Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (FCC-WTB) and private industry, RUS drives this effort to implement programs that encourage greater access and deployment of high-speed and wireless services throughout rural America.

II. CSREES-CYFAR

Through a variety of means, CSREES is teaching children and adults in rural and resource-poor communities to use technology. One such example is the Children, Youth and Families at Risk (CYFAR) Program. This initiative promotes the use of technology to improve programs, provide efficient access to educational resources, and provide essential technological skills for youth and adults in at-risk environments. Through an annual Congressional appropriation, CSREES allocates funding to Land Grant University Extension Services that, since 1991, have supported programs in more than 600 communities in all states and territories.


http://www.usda.gov/news/releases/2003/09/0328.htm

http://www.usda.gov/news/releases/2003/09/0328.htm


State and local public and private organizations contributed cash and in-kind resources that match or exceed the federal appropriation. As a state recipient of funding, Maryland’s “Building Strong Communities” five-year project aims to build the capacity of its Cooperative Extension to work with children, youth and families at risk. This venture assists low income areas through five key components: Community Collaboration, Community Needs and Asset Assessment, Citizen Empowerment, Youth Development, Program/System Development. Through CYFAR’s national education and resource network, computers were purchased, refurbished and installed in Charles and Prince George County. Training on Internet use and resources were conducted by project staff to equip the audience with knowledge and informational tools critical in mobilizing community members to make their communities a safer and healthier place to live.

4. Additional Areas of Progress

Please describe any other areas of progress by your agency to implement provisions of the E-Government Act.

5. Privacy

I. System and Unique Identifier

List system and unique identifier for IT systems or information collections, for which a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) was conducted.

a) How will the PIA be made publicly available after the President’s budget is finalized (i.e. Web site, Federal Register, other)?

b) Will the PIA be made publicly available in full, summary form, or not at all (explain if summary or not at all)?

c) Provide the publication date if made available with a System of Records (SOR) or Information Collection Request (ICR).

The Department’s Chief Privacy Officer will manage the newly created privacy program and will address issues related to the Privacy Act of 1974 and the privacy provisions of the eGovernment Act of 2002, to include the completion of Privacy Impact Assessments (PIA). Additionally, the Chief Privacy Officer is available to provide guidance to USDA staff on the Privacy Act and distribution and interpretation of OMB guidance regarding any privacy related issues.

The Chief Privacy Officer drafted a PIA in August 2002. The PIA was based on the IRS “Best Government Practice” model. Agencies were instructed to begin completing PIAs on relevant systems in 2003. Training across agencies was also initiated. Future training sessions will be held in an effort to better educate the staff on the purpose of and need for PIAs.

As a result of September 26th, 2003 OMB Guidance for Implementing the Privacy Provisions of the E-Government Act of 2002, USDA is developing a training module, which will educate staff on the following:



When a PIA should be conducted; How to conduct a PIA; The importance of privacy policies on agency Web sites; The need for privacy policies to be in machine-readable format; and Submitting PIAs to OMB.

Further, as a result of the above referenced guidance, USDA will revise its PIA to allow for consistency with components discussed in the guidance. Also, in the guidance, OMB requested that all required PIAs be submitted to OMB, via [email protected] no later than October 3, 2003. USDA electronically submitted one PIA. The PIA unique product identifier is 00596011101103000 203-075 and the title is Infra Application.

We understand that currently this PIA is a pre-decisional document and can be withheld pursuant to Exemption b5 of the Freedom of Information Act; however, at the completion of the President’s budget the PIA will be made publicly available in full via the agency Web site.

We look forward to continuing the development of the privacy program and we anticipate many successes. We are certain that in the coming months as a result of anticipated training, all relevant staff will become well versed in the definition of a PIA and will understand the importance of completing PIAs pursuant to the newly published OMB guidance.

Finally, much effort will be made to ensure consistency across the Department in the completion of PIAs and the timely submission of PIAs to OMB.

II. Persistent Tracking Technology

Is this persistent tracking technology used? (Yes/No). If Yes, please describe, answering a., b., c., and d.

a) What needs compels the use of such technology?b) What safeguards protect the information collected?c) What agency official (provide contact info) approves tracking technology?d) Provide the actual privacy policy notification of such use.

No. There is policy requiring any Program that wants to use this technology to obtain a waiver from the Secretary of Agriculture. The waiver request would have to describe the compelling need and safeguards used to protect the information. A copy of the Department’s actual privacy policy regarding the use of cookies on Web pages is provided in Appendix A.

III. Agency goals for machine readability

a) Identify timetable and milestones for progress toward achieving compatibility of privacy policies with machine readable privacy protection methodology.

b) What process or standard has the agency identified to enable machine readable privacy protection?


mailto:[email protected]


USDA will review all Department privacy policies to determine compatibility with machine readable privacy protection methodology. USDA seeks to have all such compatibility issues resolved within the next 120 days.

USDA has in policy that computers with sensitive information (Sensitive But Unclassified, SBU) should be hardened to a C2 (Rainbow series- Orange book) or EAL3 (Common Criteria) of protection and that access to sensitive information be on a "least privilege" or "need to know" basis.

IV. Contact information

Provide contact information of individual(s) appointed by the head of the Executive Department or agency to serve as the agency’s principal contact(s) for information technology/Web matters and the individual (name and title) primarily responsible for privacy policies.

Contacts: IT/Web Matters: Kim J. Taylor, Director of Web Services

Office: (202) 720-2168, Email: [email protected]

Infrastructure: Jan Lilja, Associate CIO for TelecommunicationsOffice: (202) 720-2557, Email: [email protected]

Privacy Policies: Lesia M. Banks, Chief Privacy Officer Office: (202) 720-9265, Email: [email protected]

6. Human Capital. Sec. 209

A. OPM outlines workforce planning by following five steps (see http://www.opm.gov/workforceplanning/wfpmodel.htm/). Please use these steps to describe your agency’s IT workforce planning efforts to date. Indicate which steps you’ve completed and where you are currently focused.

Step 1: Set strategic direction

USDA’s IT strategic direction comes from the Department’s Strategic Plan for FY 2002-2007 and USDA’s Human Capital Plan for FY 2003-2007. The USDA Enterprise Architecture provides the plan and processes to assure that USDA moves successfully into the future — into a world that demands interoperability, data sharing, and streamlining of processes to support the mission and goals of the Department.

USDA’s OCIO, as part of it organizational structure, has an IT Workforce Team that works closely with the Office of Human Resources Management (OHRM) and the Agencies. In collaboration, both OCIO and OHRM keep USDA managers aware of alternatives and flexibilities in the area of recruitment and retention as well as training opportunities that will enhance the skills of USDA’s IT workforce.


http://www.opm.gov/workforceplanning/wfpmodel.htm/





In the area of human capital development, the OCIO has taken the opportunity to facilitate and administer enterprise-wide training vehicles that will continue to enhance the core competencies of USDA IT professionals.

Step 2: Analyze workforce, identify skills gaps and conduct workforce analysis

In November 2000, USDA prepared a comprehensive Workforce Analysis Report. The report assessed the impact of IT trends on USDA’s IT workforce and determined baseline demographics of USDA IT workforce. As follow up to this effort, in 2001, USDA responded to the Clinger Cohen Act (CCA) requirements by conducting a study to determine to what degree executive and senior IT managers possessed each of the eleven Federal Chief Information Officer (CIO) Council approved core competencies. The results show that the most important and most frequently performed competencies, across all levels of the organization were (1) Leadership and Management, (2) Technical, (3) Desktop Technology Tools, and (4) IT Security. Three of these top four competencies, namely (1) Leadership and Management, (2) Technical Management, and (3) IT Security were rated by most respondents as needing a significant amount of development. In response to this situation, USDA initiated an executive training program for the senior IT managers. This training was very successful and been expanded since that time.

In October 2003, USDA participated in the CCA survey in which it had a 41% response rate. USDA is now in the process of analyzing the results of this successful survey effort. USDA CIO plans to use the same layout and structure as in enterprise level analysis, including a quantitative analysis, a qualitative analysis, and a set of recommendations and lessons learned. The USDA report will focus on the USDA environment and issues directly affecting the Department, such as enterprise architecture and emphasis on certain specialized job activities. Further, the USDA analysis will compare the USDA workforce against the Federal level to identify the health of the USDA IT workforce in comparison to the federal enterprise.

Some valuable demographic data on USDA’s IT workforce collected from the CCA Survey includes:

0ver 44% of the IT employees surveyed are between the ages of 46-55; 14% are over age 55 and only 4.7 % are age 30 and below.

45 % have Bachelor’s degrees, and 16% have Master’s degrees. In the short term (0-3 years), 17% of this workforce will be eligible to retire yet only 10%

plan to actually retire. Over 50% have no private sector experience; 22% have 1-3 years and 24 % have over 4

years. 80% have 11 or more years of federal service

These data mirror other demographic data that were collected on the entire USDA IT workforce as part of the Workforce Analysis Report (2000) and from the National Finance Center (2003).

Step 3: Develop action plan

As follow up to the various assessments and surveys completed by USDA’s IT workforce over the past 2 years, action plans have been both developed and implemented. The current goal is to



complete one comprehensive plan, which aligns with the Department’s Human Capital Plan. This effort is under way and will be completed in FY 2004. It will incorporate findings from the CCA Survey and be developed in partnership with the OHRM.

Step 4: Implement Action Plan

Numerous IT workforce development initiatives are underway; each designed to close existing skills gaps in areas critical to the USDA mission. Enterprise-wide, initiatives are on-going in the areas of project management, security, contracting and telecommunications.

Step 5: Monitor, evaluate and revise

IT Workforce development initiatives are a high priority of USDA. Training opportunities will continue to be exercised and evaluated to ensure alignment with USDA strategic direction in the area of IT Human Capital improvement. Measures of success have been developed and will be revised as strategic direction changes or as progress is achieved.

B. Identify the Job Categories

From the lists available under “What’s New” at http://www.cio.gov, identify the job categories and specialty areas, skills and competencies that are most critical to your agency’s Strategic Plan, Enterprise Architecture, and IT Investment Portfolio (Exhibit 53and 300s).

The OCIO is currently working with the Office of Human Resources Human Capital team in identifying the top critical job categories, specialty areas, skills and competencies that are most critical to the future success of our organization in meeting its mission. To date, we know that Capital Planning and Investment Assessment, Information Assurance, Project Management, Federal Enterprise Architecture, Contracting and Telecommunications will head the list.

C. Coordination With Your Agency’s Human Capital Planning Officials

Based on coordination with your Agency’s Human Capital Planning Officials, what job categories and specialty areas, skills, and competency gaps has your Agency identified in the IT Workforce area that require a plan of action to close? (Consult the following sources: CCA IT Workforce Assessment results, CIO Council Project Management Survey results, HR Department, FEDSCOPE (http://www.opm.gov/feddata/), etc.)

USDA’s workforce initiatives are being developed in close collaboration between OCIO, OHRM and the Agencies.

As a starting point, the CCA survey revealed that areas in which employees indicate they spend a significant amount of time are Project Management and IT security/information assurance. It is clear that these are among USDA’s critical skill areas and therefore, it is important that employees are focusing in these areas, however, future analysis needs to determine actual level


http://www.opm.gov/feddata/

http://www.cio.gov/


of proficiency in these areas as well as additional areas which need to be developed in order to carry out USDA’s mission.

The survey also identified Capital Planning and Investment Assessment as a competency in which employees do not possess a high level of expertise and Federal/OMB Enterprise Architecture as a skill that needs to be further developed. Since these are also critical areas, work needs to be done to ensure that skills gaps are eliminated.

D. What strategies have you identified to help close the competency gaps? Such strategies may include:

Learning/development activities (GOLEARN (http://www.golearn.gov), STAR and formal training such as CIO University (http://www.gsa.gov); Scholarship for Service (www.sfs.opm.gov) Project Management;

Institute and/or equivalency, developmental assignments to industry or other government agencies;

Recruitment Plans; such as use of USAJOBS and virtual job hiring; Retention strategies; such as, financial and non financial (time off) awards, etc; Competitive Sourcing Strategies

To date, many strategies have been implemented to help close IT competency gaps across the Department. Programs that are ongoing and likely to continue include:

USDA IT Investment & Project Management Training Program: This training program provides participants the tools and techniques needed to manage IT projects effectively with an emphasis on issues encountered in managing with the USDA Capital Planning and Investment Control process and other Federal requirements mandated by the Clinger-Cohen Act. The program started October 2001 with 16 students attending a 5-week course that provide individuals the opportunity to take the PMI certification test. To date, USDA has graduated eight classes for a total of 137 students, including two from the Environmental Protection Agency and 26 individuals have received PMI’s Professional Management Certification (PMP) as a result of the training. An additional 4 individuals have received PMP certification outside of the program. Currently Class 9 is in session and additional classes are being planned for the 2nd quarter of the FY 2004. All Federal Agencies are invited to participate in this program.

IT Security Training: USDA utilizes GoLearn for mandatory training for all employees in the area of IT Security. In an effort to support the President's Management Agenda for eGovernment, and specifically eTraining, USDA's eLearning strategic initiative seeks to improve the training opportunities for all employees. The first step in this effort was to form a partnership with OPM's GoLearn.gov to deliver previously unavailable online courseware. Through this effort, USDA employees now have access to business, leadership, and technical online training. The month of September was dedicated as IT Security Awareness month at USDA whereby nearly 60,000 USDA employees and contractors utilized the GoLearn.gov system to complete their mandatory IT Security Awareness training.


http://www.sfs.opm.gov/

http://www.gsa.gov/

http://www.golearn.gov/


In addition to using the free GoLearn.gov system for delivering online training, USDA is also in the process of developing a robust enterprise-wide Learning Management System (LMS) highlighted earlier in this report. This new system will build upon the success achieved with using the GoLearn.gov system and will add increased functionality and training opportunities for all USDA employees. The USDA LMS will offer not only delivery of online courseware but also includes the ability to manage classroom based training as well. Further, the new LMS will enable USDA training officers to prescribe specific training to employees based on defined competencies and skill requirements for each job position. Presently, several agencies are already using the IT Roadmap tool for conducting competency and skills assessments.

IT Management Training: USDA holds an executive training program open to all senior IT managers. Separate sessions are held on Enterprise Architecture; Leadership Out of Chaos: Program Management Seminar for Executives; Risk Management for Executives; Business Case Development for Executives in the Public Sector and Portfolio Management for Executive: A Decision-Making Process and System. An additional training session is also being designed and will cover topics critical to todays IT managers including Security, Telecommunications, eGovernment and Workforce. These high level briefings help managers stay current with changing technologies and initiatives and are directly supportive of the President’s Management Agenda.

Contracting: USDA provides training in performance based service contracting and contracting basics for contracting officials and technical representatives.

Career Development: USDA employees participate in STAR (Strategic and Tactical for Results) Program, CIO University and DoD’s IRM College curriculum as well as in industry groups such as the American Council on Technology (formerly IAC).

USDA IT-HR Workforce Working Group: OCIO/OHRM collaboratively manage this inter-agency working group. Monthly meetings are attended by representatives from the IT and HR communities of USDA agencies. The group continues to invite subject matter experts to discuss new initiatives, ideas and technologies.

Recruitment and Retention Strategies: USDA Agencies have in place formal recruitment and retention strategies to close mission-critical skills gaps. Some of the strategies include national recruitment campaigns; on-going relationships with professional organizations, colleges/universities, and other groups; recruitment brochures and other marketing materials; innovative use of all available hiring authorities and incentives, i.e., superior qualification appointments, Presidential Management Interns, Career Interns, and other internships, Veterans Readjustment Act, and appointments for persons with disabilities and other targeted candidates; and Web-based recruitment board. Initiatives that focus specifically on closing IT skills gaps include participation in the Scholarship for Service Program to hire security professionals; participation in Groundhog Job Shadow Day for students in IT curriculums and participation on virtual hiring initiatives.

Competitive Sourcing Strategies: Where deemed necessary, USDA augments its staff with contractor support in order to close critical skill gaps. Several USDA agencies and



staff offices are conducting A-76 studies around IT outsourcing. The Forest Service in particular is on the vanguard in this regard.

E. Measures of Success

What measures of success are critical to your IT Workforce Planning effort?

Continue to participate in the annual Clinger-Cohen Survey to determine where improvements have been made to critical IT skill needs.

Ensure that by September 30, 2004, all major federal projects are managed by qualified project managers in accordance with CIO Council guidance.



Attachment C - Progress update on the Government Paperwork Elimination Act

1. Introduction

This attachment documents the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) progress achieving electronic government, as required by the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) of 1998, P. L. 105-277.

The following pages:

Provide a statistical overview of our GPEA progress to date; Depict the current GPEA environment at USDA, including highlights of our

implementation efforts over the past year in response to the specific issues outlined in OMB’s November 21, 2003 memorandum to Chief Information Officers titled “Reporting Instructions for the E-Government Act of 2002”;

Respond to issues raised in OMB’s feedback to our July 1st Progress Report; Describe the challenges and barriers we continue to confront; and Convey the ongoing steps we are taking to accomplish the transformation required for

eGovernment implementation and specifically GPEA.

2. GPEA Statistical Overview

This attachment outlines USDA’s accomplishments toward offering, when practicable, an option for the maintenance, submission or disclosure of information by electronic means for transactions covered by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 and transactions not covered by the PRA. Specifically, this report describes the progress achieved since our July 2003 annual report to OMB. USDA continues to build upon the foundation of its eGovernment Strategic Plan, which is based on the principles of leveraging investments and creating a citizen-centric government. As always, we have consistently addressed GPEA as part of the broader eGovernment effort necessary to transform our delivery of information, programs and services.

Reporting Background

Consistent with OMB’s guidance, USDA gathered information from the agencies on a Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) transaction basis for the September 2002 annual report. From analysis of the data collected, OCIO developed Departmental compliance estimates indicating that a fully electronic option for conducting business would be provided for 58 percent of its transactions with the public by the October 2003 legislative deadline. However, because many of the Department’s information collections cover more than one form, OCIO determined that the commitments recorded for an information collection might not necessarily apply to every customer interaction associated with the information collection.

As a result, OCIO proactively refined the approach used to monitor and estimate GPEA compliance by asking agencies to examine on a form-by-form or similar customer interaction



basis whether an electronic alternative was appropriate. The more detailed level of data collected from agencies on a customer interaction basis served to establish a new and more accurate, baseline of GPEA implementation efforts across USDA. This information served as the basis of a mid-year update to the September 2002 annual report that was provided to OMB in March 2003. The mid-year report estimated that USDA would offer an electronic option for customers to conduct business for 36 percent of its transactions with the public.

USDA submitted the 2003 annual report to OMB in July, which adjusted the estimated GPEA compliance rate down one percent to 35 percent. During the period leading up to the October deadline, agencies continued developing and implementing electronic alternatives and, where appropriate, integrating those applications with the Department’s enterprise eAuthentication solution.

Current Compliance Statistics

USDA initiated a thorough reconciliation process following the October 21, 2003 GPEA deadline to determine how successful agencies had been in meeting their estimates. The reconciliation process involved updating the information used to prepare previous reports to delete information collections that had become obsolete, add new ones that have been approved by OMB, revise estimated compliance dates if compliance had not yet been achieved, and provide explanations for all changes from previous reports. An analysis of agencies’ most recent data indicates that an electronic alternative was offered for 42 percent4 of USDA’s interactions with the public.

Transformation Status Report

OMB’s guidance for preparing the eGovernment Act Report directed agencies to provide a completion status report. USDA continues to firmly believe that the most accurate

4 USDA’s approach to calculating GPEA compliance has evolved in accordance with the quality and completeness of GPEA compliance information provided by agencies. The original methodology—total interactions estimated to be compliant as a percentage of the total interactions with the public—did not account for situations where an agency had determined that offering an electronic alternative was not practicable. Our current approach to calculating compliance excludes those interactions that an agency feels are not appropriate for an electronic option, so that compliance is calculated based on the universe of interactions that are relevant for compliance. The adjustment in the compliance calculation method reflects USDA’s growing confidence in agency reporting and the justifications provided for determining that an interaction was not appropriate for an electronic environment. The table below provides a chronology of USDA’s estimated/actual GPEA compliance statistics and the calculation method.

ReportEstimated/Actual GPEA ComplianceCompliance Calculation MethodSeptember 200258%Generated from the OMB/GSA Access tool data based on the number of PRA transactions estimated to meet the GPEA deadline as a percentage of total PRA transactions.March 2003 (Mid-Year)36%Generated from USDA’s Integrated Reporting data based on the number of interactions estimated to meet the GPEA deadline as a percentage of the total interactions with the public.July 200335%Generated from USDA’s Integrated Reporting data based on the number of interactions estimated to meet the GPEA deadline as a percentage of the total interactions with the public.December 200342%Generated from USDA’s Integrated Reporting data based on the number of interactions that met the GPEA deadline as a percentage of the total interactions with the public excluding interactions that have been deemed not practicable for an electronic alternative.



representation of the Department’s GPEA compliance is at the individual form or customer interaction level. As a result, the official numbers generated by the Access tool and the numbers documented in this report are different. Statistics generated by the Access tool reporting feature are provided in Appendix A; however, the table below provides the most current completion status information provided by agencies on a customer interaction basis. This table also satisfies OMB’s request from the feedback to the July annual report to provide compliance information for individual agencies within USDA.

Completion Status Report by Agency

Agency

Total Transaction

s (Please provide total

numbers only)

Transactions Completed

As of Last Data Call (Prior to 10/01)

Transactions Completed Since Last Data Call

(11/01-10/02)

Transactions Completed

By 10/03 (11/02-10/03)

Transactions to be

Completed Post 11/03

Transactions that will

not be Completed

AMS 431 16 0 27 6 382APHIS 169 4 3 9 39 114ARS 20 0 4 3 1 12CSREES 16 0 0 2 10 4DA 10 0 0 3 1 6ERS 7 0 0 0 0 7FAS 109 0 0 59 12 38FNS 75 13 1 0 49 12FSA 408 2 35 169 85 117FS 46 0 0 5 41 0FSIS 11 0 0 0 11 0GIPSA 85 0 0 1 78 6NASS 555 0 12 132 336 75NRCS 26 0 2 6 0 18RBS 272 0 0 207 1 64RHS 583 4 109 107 344 19RMA 9 1 4 0 0 4RUS 375 0 0 0 285 90

TOTAL 3207 40 170 730 1299 968

Non-Completed Transaction Report

OMB also requested a list of transactions that were projected to meet the GPEA deadline, but were delayed. USDA identified 246 interactions as a result of the reconciliation process that



were estimated to make the October deadline, but did not. Appendix B provides a list of those interactions and includes an updated GPEA compliance date as well as an explanation for why the interaction was not completed.

Of the 246 interactions that did not offer an electronic alternative by the October deadline, 41 or 17 percent required an eAuthentication assurance level of 3 or 4. USDA implemented an enterprise-wide eAuthentication solution—WebCAAF—on October 19, 2003 to support level 1 and 2 assurance needs. Following OMB’s guidance, WebCAAF was not expanded to satisfy level 3 or 4 assurance requirements and the Department looked instead toward obtaining those capabilities through the Presidential eAuthentication initiative. USDA was not able to offer an electronic alternative for the 41 interactions because these capabilities are still under development.

3. Next Steps

USDA recognizes that the October 2003 deadline for complying with GPEA is simply a first goal in transforming business processes. USDA’s senior management is committed to increasing electronic alternatives as a part of the larger eGovernment Program. By the end of FY 2004, agencies have been challenged to complete the remaining interactions deemed appropriate for offering an electronic alternative. OCIO will continue to work with agencies to ensure that USDA makes steady progress toward this goal.



Appendices


December 2003



Appendix A

Use of Cookies on Web Pages5

TO: Agency Heads

FROM: Joseph Leo, Chief Information Officer

SUBJECT: Use of Cookies on Web Pages

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), published guidelines dated June 2, 2000, concerning the use of "cookies" at federal Web sites. A "cookie" is a small piece of information that may be sent to a computer connected to the Internet to track a user's Web browsing habits. The OMB policy states that, unless specific conditions are met (described below), "cookies" are not to be used to track visitors to federal Web sites. In line with OMB’s policy, this memorandum establishes a Department Privacy Policy restricting the use of "cookies" on U.S. Department of Agriculture Web sites.

Significant privacy issues may be raised when uses of Web technology can track the activities of users over time and across different Web sites. These concerns are especially great where individuals who have come to government Web sites do not have clear and conspicuous notice of any such tracking activities. "Cookies" are a principal example of current Web technology that can be used in this way.

Under this new policy, "cookies" should not be used at Federal Web sites, or by contractors when operating Web sites on behalf of agencies, unless, in addition to clear and conspicuous notice, the following conditions are met: (1) a compelling need to gather the data on the site; (2) appropriate and publicly disclosed privacy safeguards for handling of information derived from "cookies;" and, (3) approval by the Secretary of Agriculture. In addition, it is Federal policy that all Federal Web sites and contractors when operating on behalf of agencies shall comply with the standards set forth in the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 with respect to the collection of personal information online at Web sites directed to children.

Please note, while OMB's policy uses the general term "cookies," my staff has clarified with OMB that this policy applies only to tracking records, known as "persistent cookies," which are saved on a user's hard drive. This policy does not apply to other types of "cookies," such as "session cookies," which do not save data to a hard disk and are destroyed as soon as the Web browser is closed. However, when a persistent cookie is used, the user should be actively notified of the purpose for using the "cookie." The user should not have to look in the Web site privacy statement to learn that "persistent cookies" are being used.

As noted above, the use of "persistent cookies" requires an exemption. To request an exemption to this policy, please prepare and send to my office a statement of purpose and justification. If you have questions regarding this policy, please contact Howard Baker, Information Management Division, OCIO, at (202) 720-8657, or by e-mail at [email protected].

5 USDA’s Privacy Policy on the Use of Cookies on Web Pages was posted to the USDA OCIO Web site on December 12th, 2000.




Appendix B

GPEA Completion Status Report from the GSA Access Tool

Agency Total Transactions

(Please provide total numbers

only)

Transactions Completed As of Last Data Call (Prior to 10/01)

Transactions Completed Since Last Data Call (11/01-10/02)

Transactions Completed By 10/03 (11/02-

10/03)

Transactions to be Completed Post

11/03

Transactions that will not be Completed

USDA 509 20 45 123 140 181



Appendix C

GPEA Non-Completed Transaction Report(Please refer to the attached excel file “USDA - GPEA Non-Completed Transaction Report.xls” for the complete report)

Agency OMB Control

No.

Form No.

Interaction Name Original GPEA Compliance

Estimate

Original GPEA

Comment

Revised: Date of

Completion

Explanation

AMS 0581-0006

FV-498-1

Weekly Report of Berries Received for Processing (WA and OR)

10/31/2003 <empty> 5/31/2004 Date for E-authentication is 5/31/04. AMS will be putting a plan in place to determine if this agency will be going to meet the Department's anticipated guidelines.

AMS 0581-0056

TB-87 Imported Tobacco Pesticide Residues and End User(s) Certification

10/31/2003 <empty> 5/31/2004 Date for E-authentication is 5/31/04. AMS will be putting a plan in place to determine if this agency will be going to meet the Department's anticipated guidelines.

AMS 0581-0065

FV-57 Background Statement (Producer Member/Alternate Member)

10/31/2003 <empty> TBD Because of the limited number of responses, the cost of supporting e-authentication would average hundreds of dollars for each transaction received and is not cost justifiable for this program.

AMS 0581-0065

FV-58 Background Statement (Public Member/Alternate Member)

10/31/2003 <empty> TBD Because of the limited number of annual responses, the cost of supporting e-authentication would average hundreds of dollars for each transaction received and is not cost justifiable for this program.



Tables


December 2003



Table 2a.i - eAuthentication Strategic/Agency Performance Measures

Fiscal Year

Strategic/Agency Objective(s) Supported

Planned Performance Improvement Goal

Planned Performance Metric

FY04 Meet GPEA legislation Increase GPEA compliance by 25% Integration of interactions to reach 60% GPEA compliance

FY04 Expanded Electronic Government: Help USDA Agencies better serve the customer by offering improved access to government services

Increase employees enrolled in eAuthentication solutions by 13%.

Increase users enrolled in eAuthentication by 100%.

Number of employees enrolled in eAuthentication from 65,000 to 78,000

Number of user enrolled in eAuthentication from 10,000 to 20,000

FY04 and going forward

USDA eGovernment Objective 1.3“Increase the capability of all citizens, especially those living in rural communities, to benefit from eGovernment.”

eAuthentication solution must be portable.

Support USDA’s eGovernment user’s system log on during peak access times.

Number of USDA applications integrated and operating with the eAuthentication solution set.

Number of user authentications for proposed weekly peak load period (7-9AM) by time zones:

Users – Europe;Users – Eastern Standard Time;Users – Central Standard Time;Users – Mountain Standard Time;Users – Pacific Standard Time; and Users – Hawaii.


USDA eGovernment Objective 2.2“Enable business transactions with partners through user-friendly applications and seamless integration across the Department.”

Reduce the number of manual transactions.

Percentage of manual transactions for each system that are converted to electronic processes.




Fiscal Year





USDA eGovernment Objective 2.3“Streamline oversight, regulatory, and cooperative activities with standardized electronic solutions.”

Implement a standardized eAuthentication product and solution set across USDA.

Reduce the number of redundant systems for authentication, thereby increasing user and employee productivity.

Increase the number of customers and business partners authenticating using the eAuthentication solution set.

USDA eGovernment external business partners are able to authenticate.

Eliminate requirement for manual signatures from corporate and enterprise transactions.

USDA employees are able to positively identify themselves.

Number of USDA applications that implement the eAuthentication solution set.

Percentage of Government non-sensitive systems using the enterprise solution set.

Percentage increase of customers and partners using the solution set.

Number of eAuthentication tokens issued to USDA partners for high-priority initiatives.

Percentage increase of external and internal eSigned transactions conducted via eGovernment.

Number of eAuthentication tokens issued to USDA individuals responsible for high-level transactions.

FY04 USDA eGovernment Objective 2.4“Provide leadership in intergovernmental initiatives to improve service delivery.”

Ensure that USDA’s authentication mechanism supports credentials from other government agencies.

Number of non-USDA credentials that were evaluated and permitted access for users into USDA services.




Fiscal Year





USDA eGovernment Objective 3.2“Increase USDA employees’ skills, understanding, access, and use of available eGovernment tools.”

Increased awareness and use of eAuthentication.

Number of USDA employees who are actively using the USDA eAuthentication solution set.

FY04 USDA eGovernment Objective 3.3“Develop and enhance administrative and support functions that satisfy employee and enterprise needs in an effective, efficient and interoperable manner.”

USDA eGovernment systems/applications that are interoperable with the eAuthentication solution.

Reduce the number of redundant systems for authentication, thereby increasing user and employee productivity.

Number of sensitive systems/applications that are interoperable with the eAuthentication solution.

Percentage of sensitive systems using enterprise solution set.


USDA eGovernment Objective 3.4“Create and maintain a management and technical infrastructure capable of supporting USDA’s eGovernment vision.”

Support USDA’s eGovernment user’s system log on during peak access times.

Finalize eAuthentication solution.

Number of user authentications for proposed weekly peak load period (7-9AM) by time zones.

Number of potential solutions (to include evaluation of current eAuthentication initiatives); identify solution set of choice from the number of candidates.



Table 2a.ii - eLearning Strategic/Agency Performance Measures

Fiscal Year




FY04 and beyond

USDA eGovernment Objective 2.1: “Empower organizations by providing appropriate and meaningful data and knowledge for timely decision-making.”

Increased access to relevant, high quality training for private and public business partners.

Amount of training available to business partners; Rating of satisfaction with training available to business partners.

FY04 and beyond

USDA eGovernment Objective 3.1: “Foster seamless collaboration to make informed decisions and minimize redundancy to achieve USDA ’s mission.”

Eliminate redundant eLearning systems.

Increased collaboration for training development and distribution.

Increased integration and data sharing between learning systems and other USDA and eGovernment systems.

Number of USDA systems used to deliver eLearning functionality.

Number of duplicate training units; Number of redundant training content licenses.

Number of USDA and eGovernment Presidential Initiative systems integrated with the eLearning system.

FY04 and beyond

USDA eGovernment Objective 3.2: “Increase USDA employees’ skills, understanding, access and use of available eGovernment tools.”

Increase in the percentage of USDA employees with acceptable level of access to eLearning.

Increase in the percentage of USDA employees using a learning management system to complete training needs.

Percentage of USDA employees with access to eLearning.

Percentage of USDA employees using a learning management system.

FY04 and beyond

USDA eGovernment Objective 3.3: “Develop and enhance administrative and support functions that satisfy employee and enterprise needs in an effective, efficient and interoperable manner.”

Decrease in time spent per individual per course on support functions and administrative tasks.

Increase in trainee and management satisfaction with support and administrative

Amount of time spent on training-related support functions and administrative tasks.

Rating of employee and management satisfaction with training-related support and administrative functions.



Table 2a.ii - eLearning Strategic/Agency Performance Measures

Fiscal Year




functions.FY04 and beyond

USDA eGovernment Objective 3.4: “Create and maintain a management and technical infrastructure capable of supporting USDA ’s eGovernment vision.”

Increase in the accuracy of management reporting and analysis.

Increase in the ability to provide rollup data for enterprise-wide reporting needs.

Decrease in the number of redundant learning processes performed by Agencies.

Rating of employee satisfaction with training-related reporting and analysis tools.

Percentage of data from the eLearning system that can be utilized for enterprise-wide reporting purposes

Amount of time spent designing and implementing agency learning processes.

FY04 and beyond

President’s Strategic Management of Human Capital Initiative: “…provide high interest and government-required training to government employees at economies of scale pricing.”

Increase in quality of training opportunities offered.

Decrease in average per unit training costs.

Increase number of consolidated high-interest and required training courses to employees. (e.g. Civil Right, sexual harassment, ethics.)

Rating of employee satisfaction with training content.

Costs associated with training.

Number of high-interest and/or required training courses on the system catalog.

FY04 and beyond

USDA eGovernment Objective 5.2: “ImproveOrganizational productivity, accountability and performance.”

Increase the reporting information for managers to make Training delivery decisions.

Performance and productivity ratings of employees; Utilization of 360-degree feedback reporting for measuring the performance gap across competencies.



Table 2a.iii - eDeployment Strategic/Agency Performance Measures

Fiscal Year




FY04 Present users with information in a more consistent, user-friendly format.

Increase Citizen Satisfaction level to 7 (on a 1-10 scale) associated with improved ability to access and locate relevant and important information.

Reduce the amount of time required to deliver information to the press via telephone by 50%.

Increase citizen satisfaction level to 7 (on a 1-10 scale)

Reduce time required to deliver information to press by 50%

FY04 Provide users with increasingly relevant products, services, and information that better meets their needs.

Increase the amount of business and information transactions that can be supported through the portal.

Increase Citizen Satisfaction level to 9 (on a 1-10 scale) associated with improved ability to locate relevant information quickly.

Time-savings of 5 minutes by conducting business

30% of paper transaction converted to electronic transactions.

25% increase in the amount of information available through new channels including the Internet, telephone, and wireless devices.

100% increase in the amount of traffic received or retrieved (Kbs transferred.)

50% Increase in users per channel.

Increase in citizen satisfaction to 9 (on a 1-20 scale)

5 minutes time savings

30% reduction in paper transactions

25% increase

100% increase in amount of traffic received

50% increase in user per channel




Fiscal Year




FY04 and beyond

USDA eGovernment Goal 1: “ Improve citizens’ knowledge of and access to USDA in order to enhance service delivery.”

USDA eGovernment Objective 2.1: “Empower organizations by providing meaningful data and knowledge for timely decision making.”

Increase in the ability to deliver content quicker.

Increase in the number of channels through which content is available (e.g. the Internet, telephone, and wireless devices.)

Provide users with increasingly relevant products, services, and information that better meets their needs.

Present users with information in a more consistent, user-friendly format.

Increase the amount of electronic information that can be delivered through the portal.

Percentage of content that is created dynamically or delivered using templates.

Increase in amount of press coverage or printed article space on current and relevant USDA information and content.

Increase in traffic across USDA sites. Increase in number of external sites

that link to USDA sites. Percentage increase in deployment of a

corporate taxonomy. Number of channels through which

content is available. Amount of information (Kps)

transmitted via the new channels. Employee Satisfaction level associated

with improved ability to access and locate relevant and important information.

Citizen Satisfaction level associated with improved ability to access and locate relevant and important information.

Amount of time required to deliver information to the press via telephone.

Time saved resulting from improved usability.

Amount of information available through new channels including the Internet, telephone, and wireless devices.

Amount of traffic received or retrieved (Kbs transferred.)




Fiscal Year




Increase in users per channel.

FY04 and beyond

USDA eGovernment Goal 3: “Improve internal efficiency by promoting enterprise-wide solutions.”

Promote Web sites that assemble information across Agencies.

Increase in the efficiency for producing and delivering content.

Reduction in the use o redundant systems across the department.

Employees are more efficient in utilizing Department and Agency Web sites and applications.

Increase the number of functional Web sites and reduce the number of Web sites that are developed along organizational lines.

Average time from content creation to delivery.

Number of different USDA systems used to directly support the Web content and document lifecycles.

Time saved resulting from improved usability.

Time saved due to the ability to access enterprise solutions from a common location.

FY04 and beyond

USDA eGovernment Objective 3.1: “Foster seamless collaboration to make informed decisions and minimize redundancy to achieve USDA’s mission.”

Increase in collaboration and information sharing among USDA employees.

Decrease redundancies by promoting collaboration and information sharing tools across the enterprise.

Number of electronic assets that are accessible department-wide.

Number of users utilizing collaboration features.

Frequency of utilization of collaboration features.

User feedback associated with improved ability to collaborate.




Fiscal Year




FY04 and beyond

USDA eGovernment Objective 3.2: “Increase USDA employees’ skills, understanding, access and use of available eGovernment tools.”

Increase in the access, training, and use of eGovernment content and management solutions.

Number of USDA employees that: have access to the eGovernment Web

content and document management solutions;

have received training relevant to the eGovernment Web content and document management solutions; and

utilize the eGovernment content and document management solutions.

FY04 and beyond

USDA eGovernment Objective 3.3: “Develop and enhance administrative and support functions that satisfy employee and enterprise needs in an effective, efficient and interoperable manner.”

Reduction in the number of manual processes.

Employees can effectively access and use the Web Presence and Portal Services solution.

Percentage of content and documents that are processed through automated processes.

Percentage increase in employee effectiveness/efficiency due to the ability to increased information infrastructure and management.

Number of employees who have been effectively trained.

User satisfaction associated with the ability to effectively utilize the solution.




Fiscal Year




FY04 and beyond

USDA Strategic Goal 5: “Improve organizational productivity, accountability and performance.”

Increase in the ability to find n relevant information.

Decrease in the time required to respond to legal requests from the Department and Agencies.

Increase in the accuracy and timeliness of content and documents.

Increase in ability to conduct creation business processes and increase delivery without additional resources.

Employees are more productive because less time is spent searching for and navigating to relevant information.

Satisfaction level associated with the ability to acquire relevant information through search capabilities provided by the Web content and document management solutions.

Average time to respond to legal requests.

Percentage of externally available proprietary resources accessed by USDA employees through increased number of channels.

Number of reviews conducted through utilization of the eGovernment Web content and document management solution.

Percentage of responses to information queries that provide focused responses. Increase in the ability to allocate more

time to creative analysis without jeopardizing the quality of work performed in information gathering and maintenance.

Customer satisfaction level of ability to obtain desired information without visiting multiple sites.

Time saved due to improved search capabilities and navigation structure.

Satisfaction level associated with the ability to acquire relevant information faster.



Table 2a.iv - eGrants Strategic/Agency Performance Measures

Fiscal Year




FY04 and beyond

Goal 1: To enable USDA agencies to interact with their grantees through the PI E-Grants system, when implemented

Objective 1.1 Participate as a partner agency in the design, development, and deployment of PI E-Grants.

Objective 1.2 Post funding opportunity announcements on FedBizOpps (www.fedbizopps.gov)) as adapted for grants by PI E-Grants.

Objective 1.3 Accept electronic proposals from PI E-Grants.

Objective 1.4 Make payments through one of the two civilian payment systems specified by the Chief Financial Officers Council and the FGSP (DHHS Payment Management System and Department of Treasury Automated Standard Application for Payments).

Objective 1.5 When delineated, support other PI E-Grants goals such as award transmission and reporting.

Possible performance measures: number of meetings attended, amount of financial support, USDA FTE’s detailed to PI E-Grants.

Possible performance measures: number of USDA agencies posting opportunities to FedBizOpps, number of announcements posted.

Possible performance measures: number of USDA agencies accepting electronic proposals from PI E-Grants, number of proposals received.

Possible performance measures: number of USDA agencies making payments through one of the two systems, number of payments made.

Possible performance measures: to be determined when further PI E-Grants goals are delineated.

FY04 and beyond

Goal 2: To assist potential applicants in finding USDA funding opportunities and guidance

Objective 2.1 Post funding opportunity announcements on FedBizOpps (www.fedbizopps.gov) as adapted for grants by PI E-Grants.

Possible performance measures: number of USDA agencies posting opportunities to FedBizOpps, number of announcements posted.




Fiscal Year




Objective 2.2 Work with PI E-Grants and GSA to develop a USDA-specific version of FedBizOpps (utilizing the same data and system, but restricting returns on searches to USDA programs) which can be placed on USDA’s Web site

Objective 2.3 Develop USDA Web site similar to DHHS GrantsNet site (www.hhs.gov/grantsnet/roadmap/index.html) organization information and guidance about USDA grants for the customer

Possible performance measures: implementation of a USDA-specific version of FedBizOpps, number of hits to the site

Possible performance measures: implementation of a USDA grant information site, number of hits to the site

FY04 and beyond

Goal 3: To increase the efficiency, effectiveness, manageability, and accountability in delivery of programs

Objective 3.1 Design, develop, and/or acquire system(s) that can provide end-to-end support for the USDA grants process (appropriation and other budget input, proposal data input, grantee information input, proposal review, proposal recommendation and award, agency and program grants funds management, grants payment, agency reporting, performance measurement, invention reporting).

Possible performance measures: number of requirements supported, time required for various stages of the grants process, FTE’s required for the grants process

FY04 and Goal 4: To reduce burden on the Objective 4.1 Support the FGSP and PI Possible performance measures:


http://www.hhs.gov/grantsnet/roadmap/index.html

http://www.hhs.gov/grantsnet/roadmap/index.html



Fiscal Year




beyond applicant, the grantee, and USDA administrative and program staff alike

E-Grants by use of the standard data sets and common electronic systems produced by these programs.

Objective 4.2 Design, develop, and/or acquire system(s) that can provide end-to-end support for the USDA grants process.

number of burden hours associated with USDA grants application and reporting information collections, number of common Federal administrative regulations and procedures developed by FGSP implemented within USDA.

Possible performance measures: time required to produce year-end reports, time required to report to Federal reporting systems (i.e., FAADS, FFIS, etc.), time required to process and review proposals.

FY04 and beyond

Goal 5: To improve access to information about grants funded by USDA and its component agencies.

Objective 5.1 Develop capability to create reports and easily query systems for meaningful and accurate cross-USDA agency grant information, by program, by agency, by grantee, by geographic location.

Possible performance measures: time required to produce standard reports, ability to produce standard reports, accuracy of reports.



Table 2a.v - eLoans Strategic/Agency Performance Measures

Time of Delivery

Strategic/Agency Objectives(s) Supported



0-18 months

Phase 1: Design, development, testing, and deployment of a Citizen-Centric Portal – eLoans.gov – where citizens can receive information for all citizen-based loan programs, determine loan eligibility requirements, and submit applications.

Provide online loan application submission capability.

Create a central Web site for all USDA loan program information.

Make Government-owned real estate sales information available online.

Create a central data repository for eForms Services to store customer data.

Automate status reporting with guaranteed lenders.

Enable electronic funds processing capability.

Implement an interface with the U.S. Treasury for Treasury cross-servicing and Treasury offset.

Receive 10% of direct and 30% of the guaranteed loan applications using the on-line application process.

Reduce loan processing times for those applications received electronically by 15%.

Receive 25% of loan status reports electronically.

18 months-3 years

Enhance eLoans.gov to support sharing of citizen data across agencies effectively.

Automate storage facility loan process.

Expand the central data repository.

Enhance eForms to collect application data from customers in an interview format (Tax SW format) for all loan programs.

Continue Web enabling DLS (FLPIDS).

Make loan/account data available online.

Implement a capability to assess delinquent Federal debtor and debarment lists.

Develop and implement an

Receive Loan Status Reports electronically for 50% of all guaranteed loans.

Increase the number of direct and guaranteed loan applications received electronically to 20% and 40%, respectively.

Reduce the guaranteed and direct loan processing times by 20% for those applications received electronically.

Reduce loss claim processing time by 20%.

Reduce Government-owned inventory maintenance cost by 20%



Table 2a.v - eLoans Strategic/Agency Performance Measures

Time of Delivery

Strategic/Agency Objectives(s) Supported



automated loss claim process for guaranteed lenders.

Develop and implement a guaranteed loan automated underwriting system.

Provide online business planning tool for farmers.

Provide online record/document management capability.

3-5 years Further enhance eLoans.gov to support shared loan data across agencies effectively.

Implement a fully integrated loan origination and servicing systems environment.

Consolidate accounting/ financial systems.

Implement a central data warehouse.

Receive 40% of direct and 50% of guarantee applications electronically.

Reduce loan processing times for all loan requests by 10%

Reduce the direct loan delinquency rate by 20 % over the next 5 years.

Table 2a.vi - Web-based Supply Chain Strategic/Agency Performance MeasuresFiscal Year




FY05 and beyond

Income Security Increased level of nutrition assistance provided (additional aid recipients added to programs or increased food proved to current participants)

Overall decrease in commodity purchase and transportation costs will enable USDA to purchase 5-10% more food at same level of non-price support/non-bonus spending (assuming commodity prices and other factors remain constant)

FY05 and beyond

Planning and Resource Allocation Demand forecast accuracy %(average of percentage difference

Improvement of demand forecast accuracy levels to industry best practice levels (80-







between forecast demand and actual demand)

90%)

FY05 and beyond

Timeliness and Responsiveness Delivery window cycle time reduction. 20-30% increase in domestic orders received by customers in requested time period.

20-30% increase in export orders received by customer within 120 days.

FY05 and beyond

Service Coverage % of paperless customer transactions(orders).

% of paperless supplier transactions(invitations, bids, awards, contracts, notices-to-deliver, and invoices)

At least 50% of export orders placed electronically; maintain current level of electronic domestic orders.

20-40% increase in share of electronic supplier transactions. (excluding receipt of paper proofs-of-delivery and records following initial electronic transaction)

FY05 and beyond

Service Quality Percentage of perfect orders received by customers(% orders received on time and complete – order fill rate).

Increase in perfect order rates to industry best-practice levels (90-95%).







FY05 and beyond

Financial Average product purchase cost per unit of commodity.

USDA-procured transportation cost as a percentage of commodity distribution program budget.

Total cost of commodity distribution IT systems.

Reduction in commodity cost for select commodities:

3-6% overall reduction in commodity cost from long-term contracting.

Reduction in export transportation spend of 10-15% (based on long-term contracting and other means).

Reduction in overall domestic commodity cost of 3-7% (based on decrease in cost of transportation component).

$5 million annual operations and maintenance cost for WBSCM system (with currently-defined scope).

FY05 and beyond

Cycle Time and Resource Time “Procure-to-pay” cycle time (average time from award to payment of supplier).

Reduction in overall cycle time of 5-10%.

FY05 and beyond

Management and Innovation Number of food aid programs using the WBSCM system.

Six agencies (across USDA, USAID, and MARAD) representing 16 domestic and international food aid programs.

FY05 and beyond

Productivity and Efficiency Total staff time devoted to procurement operations.

10-20% reduction in overall staff time devoted to bid and contract management processes.







FY05 and beyond

Quality Damaged or spoiled products as a percentage of the cost of total commodities procured.

Reduction in amount of export spoilage and shrinkage by 15-25%.

FY05 and beyond

Reliability and Availability System uptime(percentage of time system is fully functional).

24 x 7 operation, 99.9% overall uptime and reliability (allowing for scheduled maintenance).



Table 2a.vii - Food Safety & Security Tools Strategic/Agency Performance Measures

Fiscal Year

Strategic/Agency Objective(s)Supported



FY05 USDA Goal 2: Promote health by providing access to safe, affordable, and nutritious food”

All food and public safety USDA agencies participating in Inter- agency Emergency Response Center; all relevant personnel trained in center’s system and procedures.

Number of USDA agencies participating in Interagency Emergency Response Center; number of personnel trained in center’s procedures.

FY05 USDA Strategic Goal 2 NFSLS covering 50 states and 8+ pathogens.

Increase in both number of participating states and number of pathogens covered.

FY05 USDA Strategic Goal 2 All online (Web and e-mail) recall notifications integrated.

Percentage of recall notifications available via integrated system.


USDA eGovernment Act Report 2003

Business

Transcript of USDA eGovernment Act Report 2003